In the case of Smith and Others, Trading Under the Firm Name of Street & Smith v. Hitchcock, Postmaster-General (1912), the appellants were publishers who challenged a decision by Frank H. Hitchcock, then U.S. Postmaster General, to exclude their publications from second-class mail privileges due to alleged violations of postal laws and regulations pertaining to advertising content in periodicals. The Supreme Court held that while Congress had given broad powers to the post office department regarding classification decisions for mailing purposes, it did not intend for these powers to be used arbitrarily or unjustly against publishers without providing them an opportunity for judicial review. Therefore, it was ruled that if such administrative decisions could potentially infringe upon constitutional rights (such as freedom of press), they should be subjectable to court scrutiny before being enforced.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Smith and Others v. Hitchcock, Postmaster-General argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law banning certain types of mail was an overreach of government power. The dissenters believed that this ruling violated freedom of speech and press rights protected by the First Amendment. They contended that it is not within Congress' authority to decide what type or kind of literature can be circulated through mails, as long as they are not obscene or inciting violence or crime. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential misuse and abuse by those in power who could use such laws for censorship purposes against political opponents or unpopular ideas.